. ~ , ..

Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering15 (1996) 111-118

:-~

ELSEVIER

0267-7261(95)00025-9

Copyright 1996 Elsevier Science Limited

Printed in G r e a t Britain. All rights reserved
0267-7261/96/$ i 5.00

3-D seismic response analysis of long lined tunnels

in half-space
A. A. Stamos & D. E. Beskos
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Patras GR-26500 Patras, Greece
(Received 6 June 1995; accepted 19 July 1995)
The dynamic response of infinitely long lined tunnels with a uniform cross-section
buried into an elastic or viscoelastic half-space to body and surface harmonic
seis~cdc waves is numerically determined by a special direct boundary element
method in the frequency domain. The waves have an arbitrary direction of
propagation with respect to the axis of the tunnel and this renders the problem
three-dimensional. However, this problem is effectively reduced to a two-dimensional one by a coordinate transformation and appropriate integration of the fullspao,~ dynamic fundamental solution along the direction of the tunnel axis.
Quadratic isoparametric boundary line elements and advanced numerical integration techniques for the treatment of singular integrals produce results of high
accuracy. Numerical results are presented for the case of an infinitely long lined
tunnel of circular cross-section and compared against those of a full threedimensional boundary element analysis, as well as those of other methods. Thus
the proposed method is illustrated and its merits demonstrated.
Key words: Boundary Element Method, dimensional reduction, frequency
domain, half-space, lined tunnels, seismic response, seismic waves.
INTRODUCTION

medium and hence an extensive and uneconomical

mesh or expensive special absorbing boundaries. The
BEM, on the other hand, requires only a surface discretization and takes automatically into account the
radiation condition at infinity in the infinite or semiinfinite soil media. Thus, use of the BEM results in
matrix equations of a much smaller size than those of
the FEM, but with fully populated and nonsymmetric
matrices.
Even though most of dynamic soil-structure interaction problems are presently solved by combining the
F E M (for the structure) with the BEM (for the soil) in
the frequency or time domain, use of the BEM for both
the soil and the structure has been recently shown by
Stamos & Beskos 3'7 to be more advantageous when the
problem is linear. This is because a coupling between the
two bodies is accomplished at their interface in a more
accurate way than in the case of F E M + BEM and the
nonsyrnmetric matrices of the system are, in general, of
smaller size than those of the hybrid F E M + B E M
scheme.
When the underground structure is infinitely long with
a uniform cross-section (tunnel or pipeline) and the
incident harmonic seismic wave has a direction perpendicular to the axis of the structure and does not vary

The study of the dynamic behavior of long underground

structures, such as transportation tunnels or pipe lines,
to seismic waves is an important engineering problem of
dynamic soil-structure interaction. The existing literature on the subject of seismic analysis and design of
underground structures i,,; not so extensive as for the
above ground structures. Information concerning the
dynamic analysis of underground structures can be
found in the articles of Manolis, 1 Von Estorff et al. 2
and Stamos & Beskos, 3 the technical report of Owen &
Scholl, 4 the book of Manolis & Beskos, 5 the recent
review work of Beskos 6 and especially the very recent
article of Stamos & Beskos 7 with an extensive literature
survey on the subject.
It is apparent that seismic wave diffraction by underground structures is a complex problem, which can only
be solved accurately, economically and under realistic
conditions with the aid of numerical methods, such as the
Finite Difference Method (FDM), the Finite Element
Method (FEM) and the Boundary Element Method
(BEM). However, use of either the F D M or F E M
requires, in addition to an interior discretization, artificial boundaries for the infinite or semi-infinite soil
111

112

A. A. Stamos, D. E. Beskos

along this axis, then the problem becomes one of plain

strain. Quite a number of problems of wave diffraction
by tunnels and pipes under conditions of plane strain
have been solved by either the F E M + BEM or the
BEM. 6'7 However, when the direction of wave propagation is arbitrary with respect to the axis of the structure
the problem becomes three-dimensional. Of course, one
can treat these problems as truly three-dimensional and
analyse them with the aid of, e.g. the BEM for both
the structure and the soil as described in Stamos &
Beskos. 3'7 In this work, however, a special direct BEM
in the frequency domain for both the structure and the
soil is employed which effectively reduces the above
three-dimensional problem to a two-dimensional one
by a coordinate transformation and appropriate integration of the full-space Green's function along the direction
of the tunnel axis. This idea of dimensionality reduction
has been employed by Hwang & Lysmers in connection
with the seismic response of tunnels to travelling waves,
Khair et al. 9 and Liu et al. ~'11 in connection with wave
diffraction by alluvial valleys and tunnels, Luco et al. 12
and Luco & de Barros 13 in connection with wave diffraction by canyons and tunnels and Zhang & Chopra 14-16 in
connection with wave diffraction by canyons and arch
dam-canyon systems. Reference 8 describes a special
FEM in the frequency domain, Refs 9-11 a frequency
domain FEM + BEM scheme in conjunction with a halfspace Green's function and finally Refs 14-16 a direct
frequency domain BEM in conjunction with the full
space Green's function. Layered ground was considered
in Refs 8, 10-13 and homogenous soil in the remaining
ones.
Out of these Refs 8-16, only Refs 8, 11 and 13 deal
with tunnels like the present work. However, the direct
BEM for both the structure and the soil employed here
has some advantages over the methods presented in Refs
8, 11 and 13. The FEM of Ref. 8 has the problems of all
domain methods (FDM, FEM) previously reported and
in addition its stiffness matrices are no longer real and
symmetric. The special FEM + BEM scheme of Ref. 11 is
characterized by the disadvantages previously mentioned
over the BEM used for both the structure and the soil
and in addition is not as accurate as the present one
utilizing quadratic elements and advanced singular interaction techniques 17 thus avoiding the placement of
sources inside the contour at a distance which can
only be empirically determined for obtaining good
results. Finally the special BEM of Ref. 13 has also the
problems of Ref. 11 associated with the placement of
sources inside the contour and in addition uses different
Green's functions for the soil and the cylindrical thin
shell (Donnell's theory) representing the tunnel lining
thereby making the method less general than the present
one, which can treat by the BEM any structure. Of
course, all the methods of Refs 8, 11 and 13 can treat
layered soils, while the present method is restricted only
to homogeneous ones. In addition, Refs 11 and 14

i 2 ,X P,sv,s~

y'

Fig. 1. Seismicwaves incident upon a long cylindricaltunnel in

half-space.
employ half-space Green's functions and thus a free
soil surface discretization is avoided. A certain portion
of the free soil surface around the area of interest has to
be discretized when employing the present BEM associated with the full-space Green's function. However, the
expression of the full-space Green's function is much
simpler than that of the half-space one leading to computational gains. Finally, it should be mentioned that the
present method can be thought of as an extension of the
method of Zhang & Chopra 14'15from canyons to tunnels
characterized by higher accuracy due to employment of
quadratic elements and a high accuracy singular integration algorithm.17
For illustration purposes, the response of a circular
cylindrical lined tunnel to incident P and SV harmonic
waves is numerically computed by the present method
and the results are compared against those of other
methods in order to assess its accuracy.

FREE FIELD WAVES

Consider an infinitely long lined tunnel with a uniform
cross-section buried into the elastic half-space and subjetted to plane harmonic body (P, SV, SH) or surface (R)
waves of an arbitrary direction of propagation with
respect to the axis x of the tunnel, as shown in Fig. 1.
The free field motion is the total motion in the halfspace in the absence of the tunnel and consists of the
incident wave motion plus the reflected (at the free soil
surface) wave motion. This free-field wave motion with a
propagation direction along x' axis can by expressed in
the x ' y ' z ' coordinate system in terms of displacements as

{Uf(X')}

r-t,
" l
(Uf~Z)ie

- i k ' x ' +itot

(1)

3-D seismic response analysis

where {u~(z')} are the displacement components at the
plane x r = 0,k is the wavenumber, ~v is the circular
frequency of vibration, t is the time and i is the imaginary
unit. The quantities {u~(z')} and k' have different
expressions for the different kinds of waves SH, SV, P
and R. For example, for horizontally polarized shear
waves SH one has

113

//

1 .-" "'s~~

/
gos~~. . "~Ss2

1 e i(~/c~)cs~z'

ro

"

~.

.o"

(2)

k' = (~V/Cs)sin 0v, c2 = p~/P

(3)

where # is the shear modulus, p is the mass density of the

soil medium, cs is the shear wave velocity and 0v is the
angle between the wave propagation direction and the z'
axis is shown in Fig. 1. Expressions of {uf(z')} and k' for
other types of waves can be found, e.g. in Achenbach) 8
The free field displacement is conveniently transformed into the x y z coordinate system of the tunnel as
shown in Fig. 1. The two systems x'y'z' and x y z are
connected by the relation
{X'}
[ COS0ho si:a0h i ]
{i}
y' = --sin0h COS0h
= [T] r
zr
0

(5)

where {~f(x0)} denotes the displacements at

x0 = (0, y, z) on the y - z plane, k has different expressions
for different types of waves (e.g. k = (w/c;)sin 0~ cos Oh
for SH waves) and the factor e i~' has been omitted here
and in the following fiar brevity. Amplitudes like
{~f(x0)} are, of course, functions of frequency. When
the tunnel is present, the total displacement field {u(x)}
and corresponding traction vector {t(x)} are given by
{u(x)} = {uf(x)} + {u~(x)}

(6)

(t(x)} = {tf(x)) + {ts(x)}

(7)

where the subscriptsf and s stand for free and scattered,

respectively and where {tf(x)} is obtained from {uf(x)}
through Hooke's law and has the form
{tf(x)} = {?f(x0)}e -/kx

(8)

Thus, since the free field is given, in order to compute the

total field one has to determine the scattered field, which
can also be expressed in tlhe form
{us(x)} = {~(Xo)}e -/k~:

(10)

It is now obvious from the form of eqns (5)-(10) that the

three-dimensional problem of wave diffraction by a long
cylindrical tunnel is reducible to a two-dimensional one,
since one needs only to compute displacements and
tractions at the x = 0 plane. The solution of this problem
can be obtained numerically by the BEM as explained in
the next section.

SPECIAL DIRECT BEM IN FREQUENCY

{ s(x0 }e

= [T]{u'f(z )}e tkyslnOhe ikx

{ts(X)} = {ts(x0)}e -/kx

(4)

where Oh is the angle between the x and x' axes and thus
the free field displacement at a point x = (x, y, z) has the
form 14

{us(x/} =

Fig. 2. Geometry of a long cylindrical tunnel in half-space.

(9)

DOMAIN

Consider an infinitely long cylindrical cavity of surface

$2 in the three-dimensional, homogeneous isotropic and
linearly elastic half-space with a volume V and a free
surface $1, as shown in Fig. 2. Plane harmonic seismic
waves characterized by their free-field amplitude uf(x)i
are diffracted by the cavity and the resulting total displacement and traction fields u(x)/ and t(x)/, respectively, are connected through the boundary integral
equation (Niwa et al. 19)

CijUs(X)i= IS2 U ( x , y)ijt(y)idS(y)

- Js2 r(x, y)iju(y)idS(y)
+ Is1 U(x'y)ijts(y)idS(y)
- ds[t T(x,y)us(Y)idS(y) + Aijuf(x)i

(11)

where
Aij = 6~j - c~j,

if

x ~

$2
(12)

Aij = 0,

if x

E S1

6ij is Kronecker's delta, cij depends on the local geometry

of the boundary at x(cij = 0"56ij for x smooth or a
function of the angles of tangent lines passing through

A. A. Stamos, D. E. Beskos

114

x at the boundary2), x and y are two points at the

boundary S1 U $2 and U(x, y)~/and T(x, Y)ij are the fullspace fundamental displacement and traction tensors,
respectively, in the frequency domain. Explicit expressions for U(x, Y)ij and T(x, Y)ij in three-dimensions can
be found, e.g. in Manolis & Beskos. 5 These t e n s o r s Uij
and Tij a r e singular for r = Ix - y[ ~ 0 of 0(l/r) and
0(1/r 2) respectively.
Denoting by 1 and 2 the intersection of the boundary surfaces S1 and S~, respectively, with the y - z plane at
x = 0 and recognizing the uniform cross-section and the
infinite length of the cavity one can rewrite (11) with the
aid of (5)-(10) in the form

(17)

( 2n3 [

OV~.

OU~]

+"~,Ox3 Ox~jj
where
OOl~

axj = 27rlzr,j

v " ( x 0 , yo)u.t(Yo)idr(yo)

c,ju,(x0), =

+n3\ ox3 + Ox2]

k2

_ + k2

TR(Xo' Y)iju(y)idF(Y)

OU~.
+ I q U~(x' Yo)ifl,(Y0);d(yo)

ik

Ox~ = 2~. " ~{~,s~ [e.r;(e.~)

- %K[,(~,,~)]

- ar[-l TR(x' Y)0"u*(y)dF(y)

n
2 n
+ ,jr,a [e,2Ko(a,r)
- e~Ko
(epr)]}
7

+ Aijuf (x)i

(13)

U~(xo,Yo) = I7oo U(x, yo)ije-i~Xdx

(14)

where

OU~

(18)

ik

+ ~,~ r,~ [esKo(o~sr) - ~ K o ( e r r ) ]

2

It

--

It

--

2 n
2 tt
+ (r,~a r,7 +r,~ r,'ra )[c~sKo(as
r)
- e-eKo(epr)]

T"(xo, Yo) = JT~ T(x'y)ije-i~dx

(15)

receiver points x = (x,y,z) ~ S~ U S2,xo = (O,y,z) ~ ~

UF 2 and source point Yo = (0,y, z) e F1 U 2.
Almost explicit expressions for U3 and T/~ can be
found in Zhang & Chopra) 4 More explicit expressions
for these tensors are given here reading as follows:
_- 1

k2

k2

+ r,~ r,7
r,e [esK 0 (esr) - epKo (err)]
-

It/

lit

i~ F,~ asKro(as~).
k
In the above expressions, ~,/3, 7 = 2, 3;j = 1,2, 3, # and
v are the shear modulus and Poisson's ratio, respectively,
of the medium, f is the distance between the source and
receiver points Y0 = (Yol,Yo2,Yo3) and x = (xl,x2,x3),
respectively, projected to the plane x I = 0, i.e.
(19)

= [(X2 --Y02) 2 + (X 3 --Y03)2] 1/2,

1

ik

V~o = V~l = 2n~" ~ [ a ,

K0(as~) - ~,K0(e,r)]
(16)

- epK6
= ,, (~r)]
_

2n2

ikV~j) +

n = (0, n2, n3) is the o u t w a r d u n i t n o r m a l v e c t o r to the

surface F l U F 2 at point Xo, kp = w/cp and ks = ov/G

ep = (k 2 -- k2) 1/2,

+ ~a~8/Co(e,~)}
T~=#[n2 (oU~

with the notation for the coordinates changed from

( x , y , 2) to ( X l , X 2 , X 3 )
for reasons of compactness,

are wavenumbers for the incident, P and S waves,

respectively, with cp and cs being the P and S wave
velocities, quantities e r and a s are given by

Uff~ 27r#

+ ~.,[e,~r~'(e,~)

{OU~.
ov~

.,, ~ ]

ov l

~g = u] _--z-~
~
[ix~'v~ + (1- ~-5~-~ +"-b-~;J

a s = (k 2 -- ks2) 1/2

(20)

the derivatives of ~ have the form

~3,

~,~=

~ ~ ~2

(21)

3-D seismic response analysis

with 6a7 being Krockener's delta and those of K0 the
form

K~o(Z) = -Kl(Z),

Kg(z) = Ko(z ) + Kl(z----~)

z

(22)

Kg' (z) = - K l (z) - zK(z) + 2KI (z)

z2

with K0 (z) and K1 (z) being the modified Bessel functions

of the second kind, zero and one, respectively, order and
argument z.
The two-dimensional boundary integral eqn (13) is
solved numerically by standard procedures (e.g. Manolis
& BeskosS). In this paper the boundary 1'i U 1'2 is discretized into a finite number of 3-noded quadratic line
elements and eqn (13) is employed for all the nodal
points of the discretized boundary. Assemblage of all
these equations and use of 116)and (7) produces the BEM
matrix equation
[Tg]{US} = [Ug]{t g} + {b}

(23)

where g stands for ground, the influence matrices [Tg]

and [Ug] consist of integrals over the boundary elements
involving in their integrands, the reduced fundamental
solution tensors T~ and U/~, respectively, vectors {us}
and {t g} contain nodal values of total displacement and
traction amplitudes at the boundary r 1 u 1'2 and vector
{b} contains known boundary values coming out of the
known free wave displacenaent field uf(x). The evaluation of the entries--boundary integrals of matrices [Tg]
and [Ug] is done numerically by standard Gauss quadrature when these are regular, i.e. when f # 0. However,
when ~ = 0 one has that Ui~ = 0(lnF) and T~ = 0(l/F)
and the resulting singular integrals are evaluated again
numerically by following the highly accurate direct
approach of Gniggiani & q~asalini. 17
For the case of the tunnel liner with outer and inner
surfaces $2 and $3, respec,Lively, as shown in Fig. 2, the
reduced boundary integral equation analogous to (13)
has simply the form s
CijU(Xo)i ~"

Ir~ur~ gR(x' Yo),Tt(yo)idF(yo)

where 1'2 and F3 denote the, intersection of the surfaces $2

and $3, respectively, with the y - z plane at x = 0, while
the remaining quantities and symbols are analogous to
those pertaining to eqn (13). A discretization of the
boundary 1`2 U 1`3 into 3-noded quadratic line elements
enables one to write (24) in the matrix form

[rll{d} = [Ul]{?}

(25)

where 1 stands for liner [T l] and [U l] are influence

matrices analogous to those in eqn (22), while {u l} and
{ t l} are vectors of the nodal values of total displacement
and traction amplitudes, respectively, at the boundary

1`2 U 1'3.

FORMULATION AND SOLUTION PROCEDURE

Consider the complete problem of an infinitely long lined

tunnel of uniform cross-section buried in the half-space
and subjected to plane harmonic seismic waves. The two
governing equations of motion for the half-space with
the cavity, eqn (23) and the tunnel liner eqn (25), can be
written in partitioned form as

r~l r?2J { 4

LU~l

(26)
[T~z

T~3]

u~

LvJ2 ul3j { t]

},

(27)

where the subscripts 1, 2 and 3 correspond to the free soil

surface P1, the ground-liner interface I'2 and the free
inner surface of the liner I'3, respectively.
Coupling of eqns (26) and (27) is accomplished
through equilibrium and compatibility at the groundliner interface, which read
t21= - 2tg,

U1 = U~

(28)

Thus, eqns (26) and (27) with the help of (28), can be
combined to yield

1/}

:1

4;

[ 0

-u~2 v]3J

{t}t,+t{b!}

(20)

Employment of the boundary conditions of the problem

tlg = 0 ,

- Ir~ur TR(x0, y0)uu(y0)~d1`(y0) (24)

115

t]=0

(30)

and rearrangement of eqns (28) results in

o

[Oo

-u~21 4

/
:
T~'2 T~3 v~2 / t~

b2
o
o

(31)

Equation (31) can be solved for the total displacements

and tractions at the boundary 1`1 U1`2 U r3. This is
accomplished by a special out of core block equation
solver of Gauss type for non-symmetric matrices
described in Stamos & Beskos. 7 Once the boundary
values have been obtained, interior displacements can
be computed from the discretized versions of (13) and
(14) with cij 6ij and interior stresses from interior
:

116

A. A. Stamos, D. E. B e s k o s
2.0

12

1.5

__#7 %

J.0
0.5

.J//

I
50

l."

"

X
I
I00

I ~
I
150
200
0o

I
250

I
3011

'
350

o
o

I
50

I
noo

I
150

l
200

I
250

I
300

I
350

Oo

Fig. 3. Normalized radial displacement amplitude U, vs polar

angle for P waves: - - * - - present method; -[2]- Stamos &
Beskos;7 + Liu et al n - ' - Luco & de Barros. 13

Fig. 5. Normalized hoop stress amplitude ~00 vs polar angle for

P waves - - * - - present method; - D - Stamos & Beskos;7 + Liu
et al II - . - Luco & de Barros) 3

displacements through Hooke's law. Stresses at the

boundary can finally be obtained in terms of boundary
tractions and tangential displacement derivatives, as
described, e.g. in Manolis & Beskos. 5 In this case, one
tangential direction is parallel to the y - plane, while the
other parallel to the x axis and hence U~,x= iku~, e -kx.
Viscoelastic material behavior in the soil or the liner
can be very easily taken into account in the present
frequency domain formulation either in an exact
manner through the correspondence principle or in an
approximate manner by simply replacing the Lam6
elastic constants A and # by their complex counterparts
A*= A(1 + i ~ ) and #* = # ( 1 +i/3), where fl is the
hysteretic damping coefficient:

pg = 2.664 x 103 Kg/m s, Eg = 7.567 10 9 N/m e and

Ug = 0.333. The liner thickness h = 0"lri. The dimensionless frequency ~ = w r o h r c ~ =0.105. Using these
data and employing the proposed method, the normalized displacement amplitudes U r ( r o ) = lu,/AI for the
radial and U x ( r o ) = lux/AI for the axial direction on
r = r 0 and the normalized hoop stress amplitudes
~oo(C~) =- Icroo/Wpgc~A] on the centerline r = a = 1 - 0 5 r i
of the liner have been computed. In the above, A denotes
the amplitude o f the free field displacement) s
Figures 3-5 depict Ur, Ux, and ~ , respectively, vs the
polar angle 0 for the case of P waves, while Figs 6-8 the
same things for the case of SV waves. The proposed
method was used in conjunction with a discretization
involving 36 quadratic boundary elements for the free
soil surface and 20 such dements for each of the two
surfaces of the liner. The above figures also show results
of a full three-dimensional boundary element analysis
conducted by Stamos & Beskos 7 as well as results due to
Liu et al. 11 and Luco & de Barros) s It is apparent that
the present results are in close agreement with those of
Stamos & Beskos 7 and Luco & de Barros, 13 while disagree with those o f L i u et a l ) 1 Thus, the close agreement
of the present results with those of Refs 7 and 13 and the
fact that the results of Ref. 13 have also been verified by
another method due to Luco & de Barros, is dearly
demonstrate the accuracy o f the proposed method.

NUMERICAL EXAMPLE
Consider an infinitely long circular cylindrical tunnel of a
concrete liner o f inner and outer radii ri and r0, respectively and thickness h buried in a half-space of hard soil
medium subjected to nonvertically incident (0~ = 30 ) P
and SV waves impinging in the direction of the tunnel
(Oh = 0). The concrete material has a mass density
Pl = 2-24 x 103 Kg/m 3, a modulus of elasticity
El = 1.6 x 101 N/m 2 and a Poisson's ratio vl = 0.2,
while the hard soil medium has correspondingly

1.6
1.0
0,8
-

.02

.~o;:~'~

0.6
0.41

/:/"

\'-._ :
\ %.I _...,..,,.,.\,,?.,.

:I

0.2
0

50

100

150

I]

200

250

300

350

0o

Fig. 4. Normalized axial displacement amplitude Ux vs polar

angle for P waves: - - * - - present method; - [ ] - Stamos &
Beskos;7 + Liu et a111 - . - Luco & de Barros. 13

~0s

i!/
or0

,
50

,
tO0

, \#200
150

,
250

"\-:
,
300

350

0o

Fig. 6. Normalized radial displacement amplitude Ur vs polar

angle for SV waves: - - , - - present method; -I-1- Stamos &
Beskos;7 + Liu et a111 - . - Luco & de Barros) s

3-D seismic response analysis

REFERENCES

3.5~

3.o]
2.5
2.01

1.5
1.0
0.5
0
0

117

50

100

I.~3

200

250

300

350

0o

Fig. 7. Normalized axial displacement amplitude Ux vs polar

angle for SV waves: - - * - - present method; -[2- Stamos &
Beskos; 7 + Liu et a111 - ' - Luco & de Barros) 3
CONCLUSIONS
A special BEM in the frequency domain has been developed for the seismic analysis of infinitely long lined
tunnels of uniform cross-section buried into a uniform
half-space and subjected to plane harmonic waves of an
arbitrary direction of propagation. This three-dimensional problem is effectively treated by this special
method as a two-dimensional one with obvious
computational gains.
The use of quadratic boundary elements and advanced
direct singular integration techniques increases the
accuracy of the method, which has been confirmed by
comparisons with other mmaerical methods on the basis
of some numerical studies involving a circular cylindrical
lined tunnel subjected to 17 and SV harmonic waves.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors are grateful to the Greek General Secretariat for Research and Technology for supporting this
work under grant 7821/13.5.88. They are also thankful
to Professor A. K. Chopra for furnishing to them Ref.
14.
12

0o
Fig. 8. Normalized hoop stress amplitude E~ vs polar angle
for SV waves: - - , - - present method; - D - Stamos & Beskos; 7
+ Liu et al11 .... Lueo & de Barros. 13

1. Manolis, G. D. Dynamic behavior of underground

structures. Shock Vibrat. Digest, 1983, 15 (11), 7-18.
2. Von Estorff, O., Stamos, A. A., Beskos, D. E. & Antes, H.
Dynamic interaction effects in underground traffic systems.
Eng. Analy. Boundary Elements, 1991, 8, 167-75.
3. Stamos, A. A. & Beskos, D. E. Dynamic soil-structure
interaction in 3-D underground structures. In Boundary
Elements XIV, Vol. 2, (eds. C. A. Brebbia, J. Dominquez &
F. Paris), Computational Mechanics Publications, Southampton, 1992, pp. 169-78.
4. Owen, G. N. & Scholl, R. E. Earthquake engineering of
large underground structures. Report No FHWA/RD-80/
195 prepared by URS/J. A. Blume & Associates, Engineers,
for the Federal Highway Administration, Washington,
D.C., 1981.
5. Manolis, G. D. & Beskos, D. E. Boundary Element Methods
in Elastodynamics, Unwin Hyman (now Chapman & Hall),
London, 1988.
6. Beskos, D. E. Wave propagation through ground. In
Boundary Element Techniques in Geomechanics (eds. G.
D. Manolis & T. G. Davies), Computational Mechanics
Publications, Southampton, 1993, 259-406.
7. Stamos, A. A. & Beskos, D. E. Dynamic analysis of large
3-D underground structures by the BEM. Earthq. Engng.
Struct. Dynam., 1995, 24, 917-34.
8. Hwang, R. N. & Lysmer, J. Response of buried structures
to travelling waves. J. Geotech. Engng. Div. ASCE, 1981,
107, 183-200.
9. Khair, K. R., Datta, S. K. & Shah, A. H. Amplification of
obliquely incident seismic waves by cylindrical alluvial
valleys of arbitrary cross-sectional shape, Pt. I: Incident P
and SV waves. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 1989, 79, 610-30.
10. Liu, S. W., Datta, S. K. & Bouden, M. Scattering of
obliquely incident seismic waves by a cylindrical valley in
a layered half-space. Earthq. Engng. Struct. Dynam., 1991,
20, 859-70.
11. Liu, S. W., Datta, S. K. & Khair, K. R. Three dimensional
dynamics of pipelines buried in backfilled trenches due to
oblique incidence of body waves. Soil Dynam. Earthq.
Engng, 1991, 10, 182-91.
12. Luco, J. E., Wong, L. H. & De Barros, F. C. P. Threedimensional response of a cylindrical canyon in a layered
half-space Earthq. Engng. Struct. Dynam.,1990, 19, 799-817.
13. Luco, J. E. and de Barros, F. C. P. On the three-dimensional seismic response of a class of cylindrical inclusions
embedded in layered media. In Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering VI (eds. A. S. Cakmak & C. A. Brebbia),
Computational Mechanics Publications, Southampton,
1993, pp. 565-80.
14. Zhang, L. P. & Chopra, A. K. Computation of spatially
varying ground motion and foundation-rock impedance
matrices for seismic analysis of arch dams. Report No
UCB/EERC-91/06, University of California, Berkeley,
California, May 1991.
15. Zhang, L. P. & Chopra, A. K. Three-dimensional analysis
of spatially varying ground motions around a uniform
canyon in a homogeneous half-space. Earthq. Eng. Struet.
Dynam., 1991, 20, 911-26.
16. Zhang, L. P. & Chopra, A. K. Impedance functions for threedimensional foundations supported on an infinitely-long
canyon of uniform cross-section in a homogeneous halfspace Earthq Engng. Struct. Dynam., 1991, 20, 1011-27.
17. Guiggianni, M. & Casalini, P. Direct computation of
Cauchy principal value integrals in advanced boundary
elements, Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engng., 1987, 24, 1711-20.

118

A. A. Stamos, D. E. Beskos

18. Achcnbach, J. D. Wave Propagation in Elastic Solids.

North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1973.
19. Niwa, Y., Hirose, S. & Kitahara, M. Application of the
boundary integral equation (BI) method to transient
response analysis of inclusions in a half space. Wave
Motion, 1986, 8, 77-91.

20. Hartmann, F. Computing the C-matrix in non-smooth

boundary points. In New Developments in Boundary Element Methods (ed. C. A. Brebbia), CML Publications,
Southampton, 1980, 367-79.